Can you add C# to supported languages? It's widely used and it be helpful for people and companies to see how different models fare against each other.
>GLM 5.1 was the model that made me feel like the Chinese models had truly caught up. I cancelled my Claude Max subscription and genuinely have not missed it at all.
GLM 5.1 is pretty good but there are some "buts".
They hiked the prices 2 times this year. I subscribed to the pro coding plan just before the last hike. At the start of the year, they had only 5 hours quota and no weekly quota. And I hit the weekly quota hard. I can't upgrade the subscription to get a higher weekly quota because they jacked up the prices a lot recently.
My $30 subscription costs now $72. Previously was $15.
Max was $49,then $80 and now $160.
Do they no longer charge annual licenses for Windows Server?
On that topic, it’s always surprised me just how little Apple invest into their enterprise / business backend services. Everything about the way they integrate Macs into businesses is awkward. Apple could make so much money there if they wanted to. It’s a real missed opportunity.
>On that topic, it’s always surprised me just how little Apple invest into their enterprise / business backend services. Everything about the way they integrate Macs into businesses is awkward. Apple could make so much money there if they wanted to. It’s a real missed opportunity.
Agreed! My $DAYJOB is an Apple shop and the Apple "Business" offerings are horrible. No support for a proper business developer account is annoying. A single human is responsible for this and when that human moves to a different company or role then you have to reassign the account to a different human. Configuring SSO is another trap. You have to capture a domain to add SSO but after you do that your users can't access the Apple App Store (for some reason).
There are so many places that Apple could improve their "Business" business, but they seem hell bent on not doing that. Maybe Mr. Ternus will address this issue.
The issue is that nobody (relatively speaking) uses Windows Server.
I don’t even think Microsoft is all that adamant that their customers use it.
It’s just not competitive with Linux and that ship has sailed. Linux is better and costs $0. Microsoft lets you run .NET applications on Linux and they’re better there.
I think the same thing happened with SQL Server. Nobody’s choosing it for new projects, its niche is basically legacy software.
I agree that Apple is missing an opportunity with business and enterprise but I think the issue is that they’re so far behind that catching up would be a massive investment that might never pay off.
This is similar to saying that Microsoft missed an opportunity with smartphone ecosystems. They could spend billions on getting a smartphone back on the market and it would arrive and everyone would ask the question “why am I buying this when my iPhone has X million apps on its store and is a nearly perfect device?”
If Apple Enterprise Cloud was available today who is switching and why? Apple would have to undercut established players to convince businesses to switch via a massive migration effort.
I work with fortune 500 clients, and all of them use Windows server for something. Usually a lot of somethings. For example: Active Directory.
If we look at Microsoft's revenue I think it's pretty clear that they do in fact care an awful lot about Windows Server - or at least should.
In fiscal year 2025, Microsoft Corporation's revenue by segment:
Devices: $17.31 B
Dynamics Products And Cloud Services: $7.83 B
Enterprise Services: $7.76 B
Gaming: $23.46 B
Linked In Corporation: $17.81 B
Microsoft Three Six Five Commercial Products And Cloud Services: $87.77 B
Microsoft Three Six Five Consumer Products and Cloud Services: $7.40 B
Other Products And Services: $72.00 M
Search Advertising: $13.88 B
Search And News Advertising: $13.88 B
Server Products And Cloud Services: $98.44 B
Server Products And Tools: $98.44 B
Windows: $17.31 B
You only need a couple of Active Directory and Exchange servers here and there. But who's using IIS or SQL Server these days? Sharepoint also seems to be on a downturn.
I don’t think this is clear at all because the segments are lumped together and highly unclear.
What’s the difference between “server products and cloud services” and “server products and tools?”
I assume the former is Azure and the latter is on-premise.
In that case if we lump 365 in with server products and cloud tools then it shows that 2/3 of the enterprise revenue is going to cloud and 1/3 is on-premise (and I assume that 1/3 is declining over time)
You’re talking about LAMP-type set ups and I’m talking about Windows Desktop integration services. Smaller orgs will use cloud services but many larger organisations, colleges, and the like will likely have a fleet of Windows servers running in VMs (traditionally VMWare but that might have changed since Broadcom bought them).
However if you do want to talk about services outside of fleet management, then there are plenty of niches where Windows Server has a surprising foothold. Though typically they’re domains which haven’t been disrupted by “tech bros”, which is why you don’t read about it much on HN.
> This is similar to saying that Microsoft missed an opportunity with smartphone ecosystems.
They did. But we are talking specifically about fleet management and not any random tech-adjacent industry.
> If Apple Enterprise Cloud was available today who is switching and why? Apple would have to undercut established players to convince businesses to switch via a massive migration effort.
The existing players only exist because Apples default offering is basically non-existent. Apple wouldn’t need to undercut them, just be comparably priced. The reason being that if you already have a business account with Apple then you don’t need to go through the pan of getting a new supplier approved by the board (etc).
As for existing businesses, if they’re already large enough that fleet management is a concern then they’re large enough to have people on payroll who manage that fleet. And thus to perform that migration. It might even be part of their laptop refresh program.
And if Apple had an enterprise fleet management service then they’d be able to offer tools that are locked to their fleet management (eg remote wipe). Which would heavily incentivise businesses not to go with 3rd parties.
Maybe they could find another way to market it, e.g. Windows is free but with ads, and there is a subscription which makes ads go away. Or something else. Some creativity is needed.
I don't disagree. A big reason 2026 is the Year of the Desktop Linux is that MSFT lost any interest in the Desktop PC platform. Outside selling more of my data and filling it with AI Slop.
But if, say, AAPL had won the PC wars, we'd be staring at a much more locked-down, much more expensive OS experience.
There are plenty of other big companies that people love too. Off the top of my head: Nintendo, AMD, Disney.
In the case of all of them, they may make some questionably ethical business decisions but at the same time do genuinely care about the craft they're in, pushing boundaries and making quality products.
To a large extent: the product, the gloss, the luxury-item impression. People generally aren't looking beyond that deeper into the company behind.
You can see a similar thing in the 3D printing world with Bambu Lab - people love the product (my A1 has been excellent value, very reliable, and I despite preferring my fancy more expensive toy for most tasks I would still recommend it to those starting out without specific needs that such a design can't provide), and any concern about the company behind it (slowly closing off the ecosystem, initially trying to make out that their obviously-inspired-by-the-fullspectrum-scorca-fork colour mixing option was their own original stroke of genius) doesn't matter to them.
With both Bambu and Apple part of why they get this attention is the end-to-end polish that people feel in the product experience (to be fair is a valid reason to choose those products) and a certain amount of luck in them bringing their show to market at the right time, where other companies are seen as producing more interchangeable commodity items. Without that distinction giving people a higher view of the product range, the other companies struggle to get away from the fact that we don't naturally, for good reason, trust nor love commercial entities.
The other thing working in favour of some companies is momentum: some were worthy of some adoration for higher quality products and/or greater customer care than the competition, but are no longer and it takes a while for everyone to realise how much things have changed. Disney is definitely a company that I would add to this pile, and there are others.
Another big company that seems to get a lot more adoration than any of their competition is Nintendo, though I'm not in the gaming market any more so I don't know how much of that they still earn and how much of it is just that at least they aren't Sony or Microsoft!
>So no, I do not think we should try to make AI agents more human in this regard. I would prefer less eagerness to please, less improvisation around constraints, less narrative self-defence after the fact. More willingness to say: I cannot do this under the rules you set. More willingness to say: I broke the constraint because I optimised for an easier path. More obedience to the actual task, less social performance around it.
>Less human AI agents, please.
Agents aren't humans. The choices they make do depend on their training data. Most people using AI for coding know that AI will sometime not respect rules and the longer the task is, the more AI will drift from instructions.
There are ways to work around this: using smaller contexts, feeding it smaller tasks, using a good harness, using tests etc.
But at the end of the day, AI agents will shine only if they are asked to to what they know best. And if you want to extract the maximum benefit from AI coding agents, you have to keep that in mind.
When using AI agents for C# LOB apps, they mostly one shot everything. Same for JS frontends. When using AI to write some web backends in Go, the results were still good. But when I tried asking to write a simple cli tool in Zig, it pretty much struggled. It made lots of errors, it was hard to solve the errors. It was hard to fix the code so the tests pass. Had I chose Python, JS, C, C#, Java, the agent would have finished 20x faster.
So, if you keep in mind what the agent was trained on, if you use a good harness, if you have good tests, if you divide the work in small and independent tasks and if the current task is not something very new and special, you are golden.
>Faced with an awkward task, they drift towards the familiar.
They drift to their training data. If thousand of humans solved a thing in a particular way, it's natural that AI does it too, because that is what it knows.
reply